Questions on three RPG games

Originally Posted by Arma
Actually, I find Arcanum's opening to be one of the best in a game so far. While the starting area is all that exciting, the dialogue with Virgil is actually both interesting and really funny with the upgrade to hilarious dependant on choise of race. And the whole game is hilarious if you pick up a low Intelligence character.

That's also something to do in ToEE and use the idiot as the leader, they really polished the thing and it's very fun.

Originally Posted by fantasta
I have a few questions on three games that are sitting on my shelf. They have been waiting quite long to be played.
Actually, my post is a bit similar to the one written by akarthis (it must have been some kind of telepathy). So, my questions are about:
1. Divine Divinity - is it an action-oriented RPG?
2. Temple of Elemental Evil - is it as difficult as I heard?
3. Arcanum - I heard graphics is dated but its story is very good?
Which of the three games would you recommend?
I prefer good story-telling to action. Any answers,suggestions are welcome. Meanwhile I'm finishing The Witcher for the second time.

3. Play it while realizing it is imperfect, but VERY innovative, and try to ignore the eye candy standard entirely by instead looking at it like a traditional artistic canvass painting.

2. Play it next, while you realize it is quite unpolished, quirky and buggy. Really, a basic and generic RPG with turn-based chess-like combat, and ample creativity in the form of party making and alignment choosing.

1. Play it while realizing it has more click-happy real-time action-combat, is a slightly less generic, yet slightly more stable, version of 2.


If you want story, play Baldur's Gate 2 : SoA : ToB over and over and over and…

Originally Posted by Arpyjee
1. Play it while realizing it has more click-happy real-time action-combat, is a slightly less generic, yet slightly more stable, version of 2.

I have no idea of what game you played but certainly not Divine Divinity. That's weird and hard to believe. I suspect there's a hole in the game and you can play it like an idiot and rush through fights.

Put curiosity in it, take care of details and hints, dialog with all people, read all text, and you get good text stuff level very well merged to the game. Plus plenty cool puzzling.

Originally Posted by Dasale
Ok you aren't a CRPG player, fine for me, it's weird come post in a CRPG forum.

More seriously, I don't understand that at all, but in this case, it's obvious Divine Divinity and even its weaker followup has more puzzles than many.

Well, I am a cRPG player but I don't play them to try to read a developer's mind about which widget on which wall to open first, which is what most puzzles seem to be. I don't mind a puzzle that asks a reasonable question or presents a choice that you have the information to make if you think hard enough, but I hate randomly shooting back and forth across acres of dungeon to pull a certain lever or find a hidden sequence in a series of push buttons. To me it's more of a time waster than fun.

I'm not saying that text stuff in CRPG is useless. But a CRPG cannot throw in your face a ton of text reading with an average writing quality and almost no merge to gaming. That makes no sense there are many smarter and more fun way to do it but the beginning of Avernum almost fully fail in this design terrible error.

Anyway, about Avernum, I'm only talking about the first area of the game, you are perhaps talking about the whole game.

Arcanum!!!(not Avernum!!!) has a lot of problems and not everybody can get over them to find the superb rpg inside. The world of cRPGs comprises a wide variety of styles and everyone has their preferences. I don't agree that the text in Arcanum is "thrown in your face" and has no relationship to the game elements, but I like text in games, which is why Troika's efforts and Planescape: Torment are some of my favorite games despite their flaws. To each their own, and I will not say you aren't a crpg player because you don't like text.

Does anyone have the answer to fantasta's other question, whether these games are Vista compatible? All three are older games. I don't know myself.

Originally Posted by Dasale
I have no idea of what game you played but certainly not Divine Divinity. That's weird and hard to believe. I suspect there's a hole in the game and you can play it like an idiot and rush through fights.

Put curiosity in it, take care of details and hints, dialog with all people, read all text, and you get good text stuff level very well merged to the game. Plus plenty cool puzzling.

Early on, there wasn't alot of forced combat, but when you went underground and clicked away at hundreds of skeletons and later just outside the town gates (to the west and south) at hundreds of orcs, yeah it was a TOTAL clickfest as far as combat went. It was a very good game other than that though…

But maybe you can play it *again* for me and tell me I only played it zero times, a few more times.

Yeah, that would be good…


Happy clicking !

My personal opinion:

1. Tends to be action-oriented with unsusual possibilities a pure action-gamer wouldn't expect (making honey ? Possible !) and - as margerette already said -lots and lots of things to discover & explore.

2. Not hard if you put your brain into it. It's like chess. Tactics and loooong planning definitively pays !

This might appear as "hard towards action-gamers who are not used to plan battles like that.

3. I don't really know, because I've played only a little bit of it so far.

Originally Posted by Arpyjee
Early on, there wasn't alot of forced combat, but when you went underground and clicked away at hundreds of skeletons and later just outside the town gates (to the west and south) at hundreds of orcs, yeah it was a TOTAL clickfest as far as combat went. It was a very good game other than that though…

Sounds as if you've played the demo, and nothing more.

You have played just the very first part of it, and that distracted you.

See it like the building you are in at first in PS:T, which almost distracted me, because I don't like this stuff at all.
Hadn't I known about the following story, I would've given up at that point.

Originally Posted by Arpyjee
Early on, there wasn't alot of forced combat, but when you went underground and clicked away at hundreds of skeletons and later just outside the town gates (to the west and south) at hundreds of orcs, yeah it was a TOTAL clickfest as far as combat went. It was a very good game other than that though…

But maybe you can play it *again* for me and tell me I only played it zero times, a few more times.

Clearly you played it as a… well you role played a stupid brutal fighter. I'm surprised you get your way through the orcs by fighting all the packs around the town. It's clear you don't have to do so and the game doesn't suggest you to do so and it's pure role play stupid brutal fighter to do so.

Sneak or run though the orcs that surrounf the city and now? I'd be curious you describe me the fest click.

Ok that was what I suspected you can play this game and role play a stupid brutal fighter and go through the game without to notice anything but a stupid click fest. You got the game you wanted, I didn't played it like that and got another game, much less stupid if you ask me.

EDIT : Or more smartly quoted by Alrik you only played a demo. Stop lie and you'll stop say stupid thing about games you never played. Myself I said honestly I played only the first area from Arcanum, with oubvious conclusion is anything I could wrote about it doesn't means a lot for the whole game.

I think this is a language barrier thing but please ease off the personal insults. You can express your position without calling people idiots or liars.

No one denies that Div Div has plenty of combat Diablo style. However there is much more than that.

Originally Posted by Dasale
Clearly you played it as a… well you role played a stupid brutal fighter. I'm surprised you get your way through the orcs by fighting all the packs around the town. It's clear you don't have to do so and the game doesn't suggest you to do so and it's pure role play stupid brutal fighter to do so.

Sneak or run though the orcs that surrounf the city and now? I'd be curious you describe me the fest click.

Ok that was what I suspected you can play this game and role play a stupid brutal fighter and go through the game without to notice anything but a stupid click fest. You got the game you wanted, I didn't played it like that and got another game, much less stupid if you ask me.

EDIT : Or more smartly quoted by Alrik you only played a demo. Stop lie and you'll stop say stupid thing about games you never played. Myself I said honestly I played only the first area from Arcanum, with oubvious conclusion is anything I could wrote about it doesn't means a lot for the whole game.

I thought it was an RPG, and that a variety of roles/styles were possible, and that the role YOU choose to play isn't automatically mandatory for all (but yet you are assuming it *is*).

The one on one combat, with weapons, in DD IS very VERY much a hyper-twitchy clickfest, where you have to click multiple times at any creature which comes into range, and there are often SWARMS of enemies which came into range. On top of that, when I summoned a skeleton fighter to fight beside me, the high action combat in terms of number of attacks per 10 second interval, became an excercise in repetitive MEGA-combat.

Your hurling of 'stupid' is rather unenlightening itself, so try to settle down, and try to see the big picture.

Maybe you are mad that being a fighter in DD is actually a large fraction of the class possibilities.

Anyhow…

Apart from the repetitive hyperactive clickfest combat, DD was actually a well done, artistically unique, massive CRPG which I enjoyed (except for the combat, of course).

Originally Posted by Arma
No one denies that Div Div has plenty of combat Diablo style. However there is much more than that.

There indeed was more than that, but when you are immersed in a 5-10 minute wave of repetitive combat, where you must click 2-3 times per second in order to progress, it rather taints the entire game, imo. And many others share my opinion.

Not that's it a bad game, it's actually quite good (overall).

Originally Posted by Alrik Fassbauer
My personal opinion:

1. Tends to be action-oriented with unsusual possibilities a pure action-gamer wouldn't expect (making honey ? Possible !) and - as margerette already said -lots and lots of things to discover & explore.

2. Not hard if you put your brain into it. It's like chess. Tactics and loooong planning definitively pays !

This might appear as "hard towards action-gamers who are not used to plan battles like that.

3. I don't really know, because I've played only a little bit of it so far.



Sounds as if you've played the demo, and nothing more.

You have played just the very first part of it, and that distracted you.

See it like the building you are in at first in PS:T, which almost distracted me, because I don't like this stuff at all.
Hadn't I known about the following story, I would've given up at that point.

Whoa there. Actually, if didn't play the game or only played the demo, then you never played it either.

I actually have the full game here, I've played it twice within the last 2 years, and you are simply blatantly wrong, yet you may be BLIND to that FACT.

Now I'll say it again, and maybe this will calm the false, oblivious accusations which others are impulsively spouting.

Divine Divinity has combat which is HIGHLY repetitive, based largely on your mechanical TWITCH skill, where waves and waves of enemies are common, so like I previously said, and will say again and again, it OFTEN degenerates into a hyperactive CLICKFEST.

Divine Divinity:never played beyond the first dungeon.It reminded me too much of diablo.Sure, many people say that has a lot more so you better listen them.
Temple of e.e.:best use of dnd rules.I liked it a lot and finished.Now,if a game had toee fights and the scenario of BG,well we could have the best rpg experience….If you ever play it,try the hard difficulty where you can's save in game.That gave me the best dnd experience(in battl) in a crpg.
Arcanum:Classic!

thank you for all the tips, suggestions and an interesting discussion here in this post. I've got now Arcanum installed with all the patches, it's Polish version with subtitles, and looks very promising, though the graphics seems to be a bit dated, and there's a lot of text. The Polish translators must have gone through helluva lot of work. I have installed Divine Divinity too, and it looks like Diablo to me, but maybe this is a misleading first impression.

Originally Posted by fantasta
thank you for all the tips, suggestions and an interesting discussion here in this post. I've got now Arcanum installed with all the patches, it's Polish version with subtitles, and looks very promising, though the graphics seems to be a bit dated, and there's a lot of text. The Polish translators must have gone through helluva lot of work. I have installed Divine Divinity too, and it looks like Diablo to me, but maybe this is a misleading first impression.

Anyone translating Arcanum had a heck of a lot of work to do. There's a lot of text in that game, coming from dialogue, in-game letters, item and spell descriptions and so on. And it's not at all in a generic tone or structure, it's a faux-Victorian England cadence and style, so I hope the translation gets that across as it's a massive part of the game's charm.

DD struck me as very "Diablo-ish" as well. I'm sure it's got a great came at the core, but it utterly lacked that RPG immersion I want from these sorts of games.

Divine Divinity is probably one of the most underestimated CRPGs. It is also unique in this respect, that it starts like combat-heavy dungeon crawler but then turns into "Ultima-style" game. There is a lot of combat, but there is also a lot of cool quests and role-playing. Great World presentation through numerous books and scroll and so on.
DivDiv is a great example of "RPG for everyone" - lots of action for younger players, and the great deal of role-playing for old-school fans. If more commercial RPGs follow that way we would not complain about the mainstream RPGs.

Originally Posted by fantasta
(…) The Polish translators must have gone through helluva lot of work. I have installed Divine Divinity too, and it looks like Diablo to me, but maybe this is a misleading first impression.

Yes, the first impressions are misleading. Polish translation of DiVDiv is also quite good, but there is one interesting flaw - one puzzle side-quest in the game is based on an English spelling of certain word, and it was not translated properly - it is almost impossible to solve it in Polish version unless you know the original text. Such things happen if translators simply translate text databases and did not play the actual game.

Originally Posted by fantasta

I have installed Divine Divinity too, and it looks like Diablo to me, but maybe this is a misleading first impression.

Oh, but the dialogue and the NPC depth is infinitely superior.

The music is top notch, and the isometric artistry is supreme.

(Like I said before, I think it's a good RPG).

Originally Posted by Gallifrey
DD struck me as very "Diablo-ish" as well. I'm sure it's got a great came at the core, but it utterly lacked that RPG immersion I want from these sorts of games.

I'm pretty sure you'd see that RPG immersion if you persisted a bit further. It's perfectly reasonable to dislike the combat - or even not want to spend the time to get further - but once Rivellon is open to you there are few RPGs that have better world interaction, the gameworld is wide open, there are multiple solutions, good NPCs - it really is a fantastic RPG.

The only thing about Div Div is the starting dungeon - it's quite long for a starting area and is really way too much reminiscent of the original Diablo. After that however, a nice new fantasy world is open to explore and while the combat may be everything, it's not worse than that of Diablo. While it may be twich based, there is a pause option (during pause you can change the current spell/weapon or issue a potion being drunk). And while I didn't get past the mid game (due to breaking one of my quest chains based on my own actions) it really was a lovely living world with a great variety of locatons and quests.

On a side note, Gothic also has a nice action more based on my own button mashing skills but I don't see that many complaints about it. So how come a 3rd person RPG can get away with it while an isometric one can't?

I thought Divine Divinity did two things exceptionally well that lift it out of the Diablo clone territory despite the actiony combat.

One, it had a flexible, interesting skill system that let you develop a character very much in your own way--that is you weren't limited to choosing from any one particular skillset and even though you picked from a limited number of character types at the onset, in practice you could shape your character to your own tastes.

The other was the huge world full of interesting NPC's and well-written, quirky dialogue which even in translation, was better than many a film script. In it's original language, I'm sure these characterizations were priceless.

I really enjoyed Divinity, (and in fact just purchased a new copy at Target- for only $7.99!!-since it's wandered out of my collection ) and while it's plainly descended from other older rpgs with lots of dialogue, NPC interaction, huge worlds and freeform exploring it's also clearly heavily influenced by Diablo. That shouldn't be an insult, especially coming from me as Diablo and D2 are two of my most played games, but unfortunately so many bad action rpgs have tried to cash in on the Diablo mystique that it automatically puts people's backs up.

So no DivDiv isn't a Diablo clone, but if there had been no Diablo, it might have played and looked quite a bit differently. That shouldn't put anyone off though--it's also very much a game in it's own right.